§ The result
Tezi leads Thomas International by 10 points.
Tezi sits 10 points above Thomas International under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 48 — with Tezi filed under Screening and Thomas International under Assessment. Tezi leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Thomas International leads 3, including Customer Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Tezi 83, Thomas International 43 — and at an 18% weight it carries 62% of the weighted advantage Tezi holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Tezi
Tezi's product "Max" is an autonomous AI recruiting agent that sources passive candidates, screens and ranks inbound applications via conversational chat, and schedules interviews, integrating with ATS and calendar tools.
Vendor profile
Thomas International
Thomas International provides psychometric and aptitude assessments (behaviour/DISC, cognitive ability, personality and emotional intelligence) with an AI coaching layer, used for hiring, candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Tezi is filed under Screening AI, Thomas International under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Thomas International is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Tezi | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2024 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Tezi 83 · Thomas International 43
7.2 weighted points to Tezi
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Tezi 58 · Thomas International 40
2.2 weighted points to Tezi
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Tezi 63 · Thomas International 51
1.4 weighted points to Tezi
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Tezi 50 · Thomas International 60
0.8 weighted points to Thomas International
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Tezi 38 · Thomas International 33
0.8 weighted points to Tezi
20% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Tezi 52 · Thomas International 54
0.4 weighted points to Thomas International
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Tezi 55 · Thomas International 57
0.3 weighted points to Thomas International
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +10.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +10.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Tezi minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Tezi | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 43 | +40 | +7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 33 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 51 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 40 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 58 (F) | 48 (F) | +10 | +10.0 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Tezi | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Tezi has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; Thomas International has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Tezi sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 14 for Tezi, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Tezi last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Thomas International last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next